Israeli Army Minister Avigdor Lieberman claimed that his army forces thwarted between 20 and 30 “Palestinian attacks” in the West Bank each week over the past few months.

Lieberman admitted that Palestinian resistance’ operations have notably escalated in al-Khalil's old city.

“In the Central Command, and especially in the area of the old city, a large-scale operation to thwart [attacks] has been undertaken in recent months — between 20 and 30 each week — in response to an increasing effort by terrorist forces,” Lieberman said during a tour of al-Khalil.

Earlier on Sunday, the Israeli occupation authorities announced the imposition of a comprehensive security cordon on the occupied West Bank and the closure of the crossings into the Gaza Strip during the Jewish “Purim” holiday.

A spokesperson for the Israeli Army said that the authorities have ordered the cordon to be in place from Tuesday till next Saturday.

Billionaire Sheldon Adelson’s offer to pay for moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem represents the privatization of U.S. foreign policy, says Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies.

Phyllis Bennis is a Fellow and the Director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington D.C. She is the author of Understanding the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Primer, Before and After: US Foreign Policy and the September 11 Crisis, Ending the US War in Afghanistan: A Primer and Understanding the US-Iran Crisis: A Primer. Her most recent book is Understanding ISIS and the New Global War on Terror: A Primer.

TRNN video & transcript:

SHARMINI PERIES: It’s the Real News Network. I’m Sharmini Peries coming to you from Baltimore. Right wing Billionaire, Sheldon Adelson, has offered to pay for a new US embassy in Jerusalem. The Trump administration is planning to open the new building in Jerusalem in May. It is not yet clear whether this is legal for a private donor to fund a US embassy. Lawyers at the State Department are investigating the question.

According to the Associated Press, Adelson is a notorious conservative oligarch who has bankrolled Israel’s hardline right wing prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and a right wing pro-Israel groups in the US. And some would say Adelson has also barred some important decisions of the Trump administration.You could see Adelson prominently seated at the Trump inauguration last January. The Trump administration’s decision to move the embassy led to a global outrage. The international community condemned the US at the United Nations for opposing international law.East Jerusalem has been illegally occupied by Israel for several decades now. And according to international law, East Jerusalem was supposed to be the site of an independent future Palestinian state.

Trump’s decision to move the US embassy there, calls into question the US government’s commitment to the so called “two state solution” in Israel, Palestine.Joining us now to discuss this is Phyllis Bennis. Phyllis is director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies.All right. Phyllis, tell us about why the US is speeding up this move?

PHYLLIS BENNIS: I think the significance is less about the pace, than about how they’re planning to go about it. This is a move that’s now designed to undercut the fear that many have raised about the enormous cost of building a new embassy in Jerusalem. Putting aside political issues, legal issues, financial issues and a whole host of other questions. Just the questions of the cost of it will be somewhere over a billion dollars.And for a president who has claimed to resent the spending of large amounts of money for new embassies overseas, he had to figure out, “How are we going to manage this?” That’s what led to this extraordinary new development, which is the offer from Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas casino mogul, as he’s always identified, a great supporter of Trump, great supporter of Netanyahu, the owner of the largest daily newspaper in Israel, who volunteered to essentially buy the embassy.And what that says about the privatization of US foreign policy. Foreign policy in the interest of private interests.

In this case, the interests of Jewish and Christian Zionists in the United States, as well as in the interests of the right wing of the Israeli State, is not a surprising thing, but nonetheless a shocking reality to consider, that we would be selling an embassy. A former State Department official, who used to be in charge of things, like arranging to purchase land to build embassies and that sort of thing, said she had never heard of such a thing and wondered, “Does this mean we’ll be obligated to name it after him?” It will be the Sheldon Adelson Memorial Embassy. It’s a shocking reality.

SHARMINI PERIES: And Phyllis, how significant is this? That now the Trump administration is considering having private individuals fund government buildings, and embassies and so forth.

PHYLLIS BENNIS: It’s very significant. It’s significant, certainly, at the symbolic level. What this says about the willingness of the Trump administration, that has no strategic plan for actual foreign policy, to make these reckless policy decisions solely in the interests of wealthy donors and their own constituencies. In this case, Sheldon Adelson, a leading donor to the Republican Party, a leading donor to the right wing in Israel, and an active supporter, a Jewish Zionist, an active supporter of Israeli settlements, Israeli apartheid and the Christian Zionist movement that is very much tied to Adelson interests.This is of course, Sharmini, not the first time that we’ve seen issues of privatization of policy. We can look back a little more than 20 years, where you had an example that was seen at the time as a great gift, as a philanthropic gift. That was when Ted Turner announced, sort of out of the blue, that he was going to donate a billion dollars to the United Nations. This was in 1997.

When the United States was in Arrears at the UN, was refusing to pay its dues at the UN.And Ted Turner, who was actually a great supporter of the UN, a supporter of multilateralism, came in and said, “Look, I have a lot of money. I’m going to spend it at the UN. I’m going to give it to the UN to make good on this US debt.”The problem was several fold. There were some particular problems. He didn’t actually give a billion dollars. He gave a hundred million dollars over what turned out to be closer to 15 years than 10. But the real problem wasn’t that he divided it up over the years.

The real problem was he didn’t give money to the United Nations. He gave money to a private foundation, that he created, called the UN Foundation, that he ran. He chose the board of directors. And that board made the decisions about which UN agency would get the money. So, any UN agency could apply to the foundation for funding. And this is, remember, at a time when the UN is desperate for funds, whether it was for UNICEF, or UNDP, for all of its various agencies.But now you have this private group of citizens of the, mainly of the United States, a few internationals, hand-picked by Ted Turner, accountable to no one, making the decisions over whether clean water in Chad is more important, or girls education in Bangladesh is more important. You know, why should a bunch of individuals get to make decisions like that, that affect whole populations, that affect the whole world.

It was completely disastrous in its impact in terms of seeing somehow the legitimacy of privatizing foreign policy for the whole United Nations.Now, we’re seeing this in a much more blatant way, where it’s clearly designed. There’s no illusions here. This is very openly designed to placate a wealthy right wing Zionist, a wealthy right wing supporter of the most right wing sectors of the Israeli state, the most right wing sectors of the Republican Party. And he wants it, so he gets it. There is, of course, additional problems. The small problems, like international law that recognizes that Jerusalem is occupied territory, small item. A small item, like what it says to the Palestinians.

That the new temporary annex, the temporary embassy in Jerusalem before the big one, the Adelson Embassy, is built, will be announced and they will move in, in just a couple of months on when? May 15th of this year, which will be the 70th year since the Nakba, like the Palestinians call, “The Nakba.” The catastrophe that led to the expulsion and dispossession of over 750,000 Palestinians from their land. Land to which they’ve never to this day been allowed to return. That’s the day that the Israelis celebrate as Independence Day and that’s the day that the US will officially open a small, temporary embassy in Jerusalem, which will make all the political points, all the symbolic points before they even begin to deal with is it even legal for Sheldon Adelson to buy himself an embassy?

SHARMINI PERIES: Phyllis, can you speak to the legal basis, or lack thereof, of this move in terms of the US embassy moving to Jerusalem and a private entity paying for this?

PHYLLIS BENNIS: Well, those are two different questions. In terms of US law, there’s no US law that would prohibit a US embassy from being anywhere. There is international law. But as we know, this administration in particular, and earlier administrations as well, have not been too worried about international law. There was a US law passed in 1995, signed by President Clinton, that mandated the move of the embassy to Jerusalem. It was widely understood to be purely symbolic for members of congress who wanted to placate their own pro Israel donors. That’s what it was all about. It was talked about very openly at the time.What happened next was that they all realized that it would be disastrous in terms of actual policy to actually do that.

So, they inserted in the law, an exception that says, “Every six months, the President, if she or he decides, can issue a waiver that says national security interests mandate that we not implement this yet. We’re going to put it aside. And every president, every six months since 1995 has done that, until Donald Trump this last time.He issued the waiver, but said, “The waiver this time is only about timing and we’re going to go ahead and do it.” So, there’s no reason that this has to be done in terms of US law. And under international law, of course, it’s illegal altogether.Now there is a law, there’s a regulation in the State Department that has a formal process for accepting gifts. Part of the language of that, and that includes real estate. It includes very rigorous reviews. It’s designed to make sure that, and I quote here, “That the gift would not give the appearance of a conflict of interest.”

So, that’s an official regulation. Now, this isn’t an appearance of a conflict of interest. This is a straight up open, acknowledged conflict of interest. So, this stands in complete violation of at least that regulation of the State Department. The problem is, like with international law, State Department regulations are only useful if somebody’s prepared to defend them. Is there anyone in congress who’s prepared to defend it? Is there a lawsuit that can be brought? Whose behalf would it be brought on? These are all questions that remain.Right now we’re looking at a situation where the State Department has not issued a final decision whether or not they believe it to be legal to accept money under these terms, that would essentially be the Sheldon Adelson Embassy. Whether or not it’s officially named for him, it’s understood to be built in his interests with his money.

So, what else are we going to call it? We don’t know if the State Department will acknowledge that it’s legal, or claim that it’s legal when it’s clearly not.And then the question will be, if they try to do that, who in congress, who in the judiciary, who else might stand up and say, “This is not legal. Aside from being politically dangerous, morally bankrupt and a whole host of other things. It’s also not legal.”

SHARMINI PERIES: All right. Phyllis. I thank you so much for joining us today, and I look forward to having you back because I think this issue isn’t going away any time soon.

PHYLLIS BENNIS: I look forward to it. Thanks, Sharmini.SHARMINI PERIES: And thank you for joining us here on The Real News Network.

So hastily did Israeli snipers snatch the life of one of the participants in the peaceful protests at the Gaza borders, Ahmed Mohammed Abu Helou, after shooting him by an explosive bullet in the head, leading to his eventual death after days of falling in a comma.

Ahmed Abu Helou, 19, was hit by an explosive bullet in the back of his head, causing an extensive damage to his brain.

The PIC reporter noted that when he went to cover his story, and while looking for some details from his brothers and relatives about him, they summed up his biography by saying, “he was a very simple person in his relations with others,” condemning the crime of the Israeli sniper who hit him by an explosive bullet.

The Bureij refugee camp border point remains the hottest point along the separation fence between Gaza Strip and 1948 occupied Palestine, which has witnessed the martyrdom and injury of hundreds of young men and women since the outbreak of the Jerusalem Intifada in October 2016, after they took part in peaceful protests.

A friend of the border

Mustapha al-Lidawi, 19, is the closest friend of Abu Helou, who knows more than anyone else of the detail of the incident of the injury and martyrdom of the young man. He used to accompany him during the peaceful protests, along with other friends, many of them were killed too, such as Gamal Musleh, Mohammed Abu Sa'ada, Amir Abu Musaed, Abdul Rahman Al Dabbagh and others.

On the day of the incident, Abu Helou and his friends happily sang a traditional song (Diheyya) that was the final chapter of Abu Helou’s life, which ended by the Israeli explosive bullet.

He said: “We were singing without causing any harm. He placed his hand on my shoulders when another young man shouted at him. With his back facing the borders, an Israeli sniper hit him with an explosive bullet in the back of his head.”

Helou fell into Mostafa’s hands and began bleeding due to a deep hole in his skull. He looked up and was unconscious. Mostafa tried to pull him away with the help of other young men. Israeli snipers kept shooting and the bullets kept coming along with gas grenades, hitting the belly of a young man.

An ambulance took Helou to the hospital, leaving Mostafa on the ground, unconscious. When he regained consciousness, he rushed to the hospital and found his friend clinically dead. A week later, he was pronounced dead.

The occupation forces have escalated their aggression on the border areas by targeting every moving vehicle with explosive bullets and sometimes artillery shells, especially after the Israeli army confirmed that it would deal differently with anyone approaching the border following the explosion of a device east of Khan Younis two weeks ago.

A sudden departure

The sadness of Suleiman Abu Helou, Ahmed’s brother, who is two years older than him, is clear. He prays to God to be merciful to him, and questions the reason behind his assassination, despite his innocence and regardless of the fact that he posed no threat to the occupation soldiers.

“My brother was quite young, and everything about his personality was beautiful. He never harmed anyone. We used to go around together. I was shocked by the news that he was hit by an explosive bullet,” said Suleiman.

When Saleh Abu Helou, the cousin of the martyr, who is eight years older than him, recalled memories with his cousin, he remembered him as a child, who left this life suddenly due to an unfair shooting.

“I still treat him as my little cousin. He was a very innocent and simple young man. I am very sad for his death. I went with my cousins and relatives to stay next to him at the hospital and he was in a state of clinical death. We said a final goodbye to him.”

In the last days of Helou’s life, he was very busy taking the children of his brother Hani, Mohammad, Talin, Abed Rabbo, unusually, which left Hani in surprise and mixed feelings, before he left them forever.

An Israeli bill that allows the Israeli government to slash funds to the Palestinian Authority (PA) because of salaries paid to Palestinian prisoners and their families was approved on Sunday, in a move condemned by activists as “an act of piracy.”

Israel’s Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved the bill, which calls for deducting welfare payments paid to the prisoners and their families from the tax revenues that Israel transfers to the PA.

The bill will have to pass three readings in the Knesset plenum before it becomes law.

According to Israeli news outlets, the bill would see Israel cut around NIS 1 billion ($285 million) from the annual tax revenues it allegedly hands over to the PA.

The bill was initiated by opposition Yesh Atid MK Elazar Stern.

The funds that Israel is planning to deduct would be funneled to Israeli settlers and settlement projects across the occupied Palestinian territories.

Reacting to the decision of the Ministerial Committee for Legislation, many activists denounced the move as an act of piracy and flagrant theft of money.

The approval of the bill comes in the context of the campaign of incitement and hostility waged by the occupation government against the prisoners and the families of the martyrs and wounded anti-occupation protesters.

Israeli authorities have completed the construction of a watchtower checkpoint at the entrance of Damascus Gate, the main gate into the Muslim Quarter of occupied East Jerusalem’s Old City.

The watchtower checkpoint is one of three which Israel began to install last month, drawing criticism from Palestinian residents of the Old City, who say the construction watchtower is aimed at further restricting Palestinian access to the area and solidifying an already constant presence of Israeli forces in the area.

Damascus Gate was the site of several violent attacks after a wave of unrest began in October 2015, characterized largely by small-scale stabbing attacks against uniformed Israeli forces.

A number of Palestinians were also shot and killed in the area by Israeli forces, during alleged attempted attacks.

In addition to the police watch tower, surveillance cameras have been set up by Israel at almost every corner and street in and around the Old City to monitor all activity.

In June 2017, Israeli officials, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, approved a new “security strategy” at the Damascus Gate area, after Netanyahu suggested it be turned into a “sterile area.”

Israel’s Channel 2 reported at the time that the approved security strategy will include building high, above-ground “surveillance points” in areas where Israeli forces will be stationed, “making it difficult for Palestinians to approach Israeli soldiers.”

“Certain routes will be specified for entering the Old City at the Damascus Gate, and more technological devices will be installed and used at the area to maintain Israeli police’s control and surveillance over the area.”

Additionally, Channel 2 said that Palestinians will only be allowed to enter the Old City through Damascus Gate via specific routes, where Palestinians will undergo “thorough searches.”

Israeli media and officials lauded the extensive surveillance system as being an active deterrent of “lone wolf attacks.”

However, according to Ma’an News Agency, the narrative of “lone wolf” assailants under the influence of online incitement, which has been perpetuated by the current right-wing Israeli government, has been dismissed by analysts as overly simplistic.

Palestinians have instead pointed chiefly to the frustration and despair brought on by Israel’s 50-year military occupation of the Palestinian territory and the absence of a political horizon as reasons for the outbreak of violence that started in October 2015.

“The Palestinian officers and the security coordination deserve a good word. The Palestinians also understand that the security coordination is a mutual interest, which is why we work to preserve it”, he said.

Two IOF soldiers on Monday mistakenly drove into the West Bank city of Jenin and were assaulted by Palestinian youths before more than 100 members of the PA security forces in civilian and official attire worked together to bring the Israeli soldiers to safety.

Political bureau member of Hamas Husam Badran hailed on Tuesday Palestinian anti-occupation protesters throughout the West Bank who have been standing on guard to ongoing Israeli crimes.

In tweets published in response to the security cooperation between the Israeli occupation and the Palestinian Authority forces, Badran condemned the ongoing security coordination and paid tribute to the Palestinian anti-occupation youth who have been defending their land regardless of their partisan affiliations.

“Those who have been protecting the occupiers at gunpoint and siding against their people do not represent the Palestinian people,” said Badran.

The Hamas leader spoke out against underway attempts to cooperate with the Israelis despite their simmering terrorism and crimes across the occupied Palestinian territories. “When on earth will such parties follow their people’s choices?” he wondered.

Arab parliamentarians called, on Saturday, for severing ties with any country that recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel or transfers its embassy to the occupied city.

At the end of their third annual conference held in Cairo, heads of Arab parliaments urged the Arab summit, scheduled to be held in Saudi Arabia, in March, to sever all relations with countries that recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

They also stressed, according to WAFA, support of the Palestinian leadership and the decisions it has taken to counter the US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, urging for backing the Palestinian leadership at all levels, through Arab financial and political support.

The presidents of the Arab parliaments stressed their rejection of US President Donald Trump’s decision on Jerusalem and its consequences, stressing that such a decision violates international law.

The parliamentarians said that the US administration cannot be a fair sponsor and broker for the peace process after this unjust decision, adding that the US move was faced by an international rejection.

They also stressed rejection of US administration policy aimed at proposing projects or ideas related to the Palestinian issue that are outside the rules of international law and the United Nations resolutions, asserting that the US is trying to impose a solution that does not meet the minimum rights of the Palestinian people.

The Israeli human rights center B'Tselem on Saturday said that the Israeli army in January 2018 deliberately killed five Palestinians, four of whom were children, without justification.

B'Tselem revealed in a report that on 3rd January the Israeli soldiers shot Mus'ab al-Soufi, 16, a resident of Deir Nizam village in Ramallah, in the neck and killed him.

On 11th January, according to the human rights center, the Israeli soldiers shot the 17-year-old Ali Qino directly in the head in Iraq Burin village in Nablus. On the same day, Amir Abu Musaed, 15, was killed in a similar incident during a demonstration near the border fence east of Deir al-Balah city in the central Gaza Strip.

Both Ahmad Salim, 28, and Laith Abu Naim, 16, were killed in Qalqilya and Ramallah, respectively, after being targeted with live bullets to the head for no apparent reason.

Based on B'Tselem's investigation, the Israeli soldiers opened fire at those Palestinians, particularly in the upper parts of their bodies, during peaceful demonstrations and stone-throwing protests, which means that they were not posing any threat to the soldiers' lives.

The report underlined that such practices make open-fire instructions meaningless because the purpose of these instructions is to limit the use of live ammunition for killing. They also reflect Israel's blatant disregard for the lives of Palestinian civilians, it added.

Speaking to Israel Hayom paper, US President Donald Trump considered his recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital as one of the highlights of his presidency thus far.

Israel Hayom, a daily that largely backs Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, carried some quotes Friday from an interview with Trump to be published next week.

When asked to name the most memorable event of his presidency, it quotes Trump as saying "I think Jerusalem was a very big point. And I think it was a very important point. The capital, having Jerusalem be your great capital, was a very important thing to a lot of people."

On Dec. 6, Trump decided to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital and vowed to relocate the U.S. Embassy to the city.

The decision has generated a series of angry reactions in Palestine and around the world as it ended all hopes that the long-moribund peace process might lead to an independent Palestinian state.